28mm Elmarit v.1 serial numbers

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the Wiki here on the forum the dates and serial numbers for the v.1 are:

2061501-2063500 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit (ELC+ELW-RS) 1964

2196901-2198100 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit (ELC-RS+YS) 1966

TOTAL ASSIGNED SERIAL NUMBERS 1964-1966 - 3,200

Mine is amongst the second batch YS but was made in Germany, not Canada.

Can someone update the Wiki or should I sign up to do so?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[luigi bertolotti]

A 28mm v1 2.19x.xxx made in Wetzlar ? Quite a rarity, I think… I have always been intrigued by this lens (I have a Wetzlar 2.063.241 RS) and so keep track of the items i see on the Net : till now, the only 2nd batch marked Wetzlar that I spotted is 2.198.003  (not so many in my list, indeed… around 70 of the 2nd batch - in the first batch situation is mixed, with an apparent majority of Canadians) : can you tell the s/n of yours and post a picture ?

(btw : I recorded also a Canada v1 2.314.880... but the picture wasn't complete, and could be a wrong statement of the seller : you couldn't decide if it was a v1 or v2)

 

 

Edited February 2, 2019 by luigi bertolotti

[pgk]

Serial number is 2197997 and the lens is clearly engraved 'Made in Germany'. I'll try to photograph it and post pix sometime soon. Given the low numbers of this lens (3200) I can't see that it would have been worthwhile making two different sets of components in different countries. I would guess that the all components were made and then assembly took place in both countries, and lenses were engraved as assembled. Engraving would be easy enough in each country, but to have two production lines making the same items in two countries for such a low production run seems highly unlikely to me.

I'm intrigued by the lack of colour problems given the closeness of the rear of the lens to the sensor: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293915-28mm-elmarit-v1-snap/

 

[luigi bertolotti]

Me too tend towards the hipotesis of parts probably "intertraded" between the two factories… and with some oddities as usual in Leitz history (I have record of a pair of items of the first batch with "Canada" on the front ring an "Made in Germany" engraved on the base) ; is worth noting that, though introduced when Ontario was a well-geared lens design facility, the v1 9 element Elmarit was designed in Wetzlar (according to some experts, with some Schneider-provided glass elements) , while the subsequent v2 was a Canadian designed (Mandler) and Canada-only made item.  Maybe the v1 lenses' group were all made in Germany ?  Maybe was there some import-duty related issue that made it anyway convenient to assemble in Canada items for the USA market ?  I suppose that somewhere (VIDOM Magazine ?) the story of the Elmarit 28 v1 has been   reported by some historicians… after all they were '60s... not an ancient era. Any further clarification woulbe very welcome.

 

[pgk]

2 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

.....is worth noting that, though introduced when Ontario was a well-geared lens design facility, the v1 9 element Elmarit was designed in Wetzlar (according to some experts, with some Schneider-provided glass elements) ..... Maybe the v1 lenses' group were all made in Germany ?  Maybe was there some import-duty related issue that made it anyway convenient to assemble in Canada items for the USA market ?

Interesting. I had wondered if the Elmarit v.1 had some Super-Angulon 'heritage' as its almost as deeply recessed into the camera. But its shown as the result of 4 designers and I'd guess that the Super-Angulon carried patents, and in any case I'd doubt that Leica would have wanted to have upset Schneider who were supplyng them with lenses at this time. I'd equally be dubious about Leica asking Schneider to make lens elements for them unless there was a compelling technical reason to do so and there doesn't seem to anything unique in the lens diagram for the Elmarit. But you never know.

It makes better sense for the lens elements to be made in one place and perhaps Germany would have been the place - the designers all seem to have been German? Perhaps even, all components were made in Germany and if the USA was the bigger market then its possible that more were assembled from imported parts in Midland than were assembled in Germany? All conjecture of course. It would be interesting to know the real story.

[luigi bertolotti]

Marco Cavina, in one of his many excellent essays, displays no less than 3 prototype designs of the Elmarit 28 (all from the Wetzlar crew) ,all dated 1960, plus a 4th prototype design based on the same schema, but for a 21mm lens of same aperture : he quotes the Zeiss Biogon as "inspiration" for the Wetzlar design, and details that one of the glasses was surely a Leitz lab formulation; suggests also that the 21mm version was probably not developed for the current agreements with Schneider on that focal (essay in Italian, I quote it for non-italian Readers…)

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

FWIW, both Puts in his Compendium and Laney in his Collectors Guide list the 28 Elmarit as v.1-Wetzlar and v.2-Canada, without any overlap.

But I always take a grain of salt with any definitive assignment of Leica S/Ns, especially near a transition in versions. We have to remember Leitz/Leica was just a company trying to get products out the door efficiently, not provide an exact history for collectors to peruse 50 years later.

I've also caught enough mistakes in the Leica Wiki to consider it non-authoritative in such things as who designed what, which factories made what, and SN ranges. About all I trust are the pictures and pdfs - anything else I double-check against other sources.

BTW - Puts lists the 28 v.2 as starting with SN 2314801.

Paul, your experience with the v.1 on digital is illuminating ( ). But, while we say, for simplicity, that color vignetting on digitals is due to the "distance of the rear element" to the sensor, in reality what counts is the virtual distance from the exit pupil. Which is why, for example, the Digilux 2 "28-90" almost literally touched the sensor, without color vignetting.

The exit pupil virtual distance being - if you look through the lens from the back - the apparent distance to the bright pupil, as distorted, magnified or "minified" by the rear-most elements.

And it was a standard trick of lens designers working with symmetrical wide-angles (Biogon, Super-Angulon, Elmarit v.1) - in order to reduce overall vignetting even on film - to play with the rear element curvatures and such so that approaching the image corners, the pupil appeared magnified (in effect, increasing the size of the "light source") to counteract natural vignetting (the fact that light falls off as the square of the distance from the source, and so with a 21-ish lens with a FoV of 90°, the half-angle at the corners is 45° and thus the light travels 1.14159 times as far to get to the corners as it does to get to the center, and thus loses a stop (half the brightness, since 1.14159 squared = 2).

That may be why the 28 v.1 has surprisingly minimal color stains, as opposed to the 21 SA or 15 Hologon/Super-Heliar.

As to similarities between SAs and Biogons and other wides from the 1950s-60s, yes, the SA was a copy of the Zeiss. Remember that a great many German photo (and other) patents were voided by the Allies following WW2 and put into the public domain, thus making it easy for Schneider (and Fuji and Nikon) to copy the 4x5 and smaller "Biogon" designs, and of course for Nikon to copy the Contax and Canon to copy the Leica. (And Kodak to swipe the Agfacolor color neg patents as the basis for Kodacolor).

Edited February 4, 2019 by adan

[pgk]

Few manufacturers seem prepared to publish really useful lens data. Exit and entrance pupils should be stated from the lens flange which would be the most practical and helpful way of doing so because its easily used by the photographer. Unfortunately if stated (rare) its often from another point such as from the front lens element or some other equally frustrating datum. But you are most likely right in that the rear exit pupil is well inside the lens. I'm not sure when the Super-Angulon design was patented - I've assumed that it was patented as the original Angulon patent must have expired, so it may have been post WWII in order to ('re-')patent' the newer design??? Interesting information from Luigi about the prototypes - again this tends to suggest a German design and thus most likely German production and some Canadian assembly to me (Marco Cavini's material is excellent but I struggle to find it sometimes and don't speak Italian).

I take on board your point about the wiki - the web is as good as its input which often leaves something to be desired even when its carefullt moderated and checked simply because it relies on interested people and their access to accurate information. FWIW I have my suspicions that even Kingsland's book on the history of photographic optics may not be all that accurate about dates in places. Today we can access things like the Photographic Journal online and check contemporary records. Kingsland would have had to make a transatlantic trip to do so - prohibitively expensive - to check hard copy.

[willeica]

Paul, I have just come across this. Thiele says that that the batch to which your lens belongs came from Midland and ran from 2196901 to 2198300 (a number similar to one that Luigi mentioned above). Both Lager and van Hasbroeck point to a design change at 2314921 and the latter also mentions this was a Canadian design. Is it the case that your lens has Canada on the front ring and 'Made in Germany' engraved on the body? If that is so, you could perhaps assume that some parts were made in Germany or came from existing German stock, but were assembled in Canada for some of the Version 1 models and that design and production shifted to Canada for Version II.

I will mail you something later that might also help with this.

William

 

[pgk]

Interesting! Here's a snap of the lens which clearly shows it to have Leitz Wetzlar on the front and Made in Germany on the side.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[luigi bertolotti]

My v1 has the single screw onto the front ring in a different position (between the "E" and "T" of WETZLAR)… but is a 1st batch… and maybe isn't a significant detail…   (also, the focus tab "nail" is black painted… but this is a well known variation - "Made in Germany" is exactly the same in style - about same position if your lens is at infinity)

Edited February 4, 2019 by luigi bertolotti

[pgk]

Luigi I cannot pm you as you 'cannot receive messages'. If you can sort this I will forward some relevant information.

[luigi bertolotti]

A VERY odd-numbered Wetzlar v1...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited February 7, 2019 by luigi bertolotti

[pgk]

Its conjecture, but to me it really does look as though these lenses were produced from a pool of parts, which would explain both the mix of Canadian and German (assembled) versions and the rather odd and wide spread of serial numbers, as v.1 lens serial numbers do overlap the v.2 lens substantially (Leica tell me that v.1 run from 2061501 to 2533850 and v.2 from 2314801 to 2978550). I just wonder if two batches of parts were produced in Germany; a first batch which was used up, then a second, but shortly after the second batch of parts was made, the Canadian v.2 lens was ready to launch. After that only odd copies of v.2 were sold (to order perhaps?) and the last copy was 2533850. This could also explain the dates of production. It would be interesting to see if all the later v.1 lenses were labelled as German production which might well support this suggestion?

[willeica]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Its conjecture, but to me it really does look as though these lenses were produced from a pool of parts, which would explain both the mix of Canadian and German (assembled) versions and the rather odd and wide spread of serial numbers, as v.1 lens serial numbers do overlap the v.2 lens substantially (Leica tell me that v.1 run from 2061501 to 2533850 and v.2 from 2314801 to 2978550). I just wonder if two batches of parts were produced in Germany; a first batch which was used up, then a second, but shortly after the second batch of parts was made, the Canadian v.2 lens was ready to launch. After that only odd copies of v.2 were sold (to order perhaps?) and the last copy was 2533850. This could also explain the dates of production. It would be interesting to see if all the later v.1 lenses were labelled as German production which might well support this suggestion?

What you say makes sense, Paul. The 2314801 start No for V2 is very close to the the 2314921 for the Canadian design change which I quoted from Lager and van Hasbroeck above. At this stage, the Leica Archives do not seem to have records from the period in question down to individual lenses - camera records seem to be more complete. There seems to be some evidence of parts made in Germany being used in Canadian construction. I believe that I have seen other examples of this, particularly when the same model was being manufactured on both sides of the Atlantic. The Blue Book gives the same model No (11801) for both the V1 and V2. If production was shifting to Canada for the V2 it would have been entirely logical to have sent existing parts, surplus to requirements, from Germany to Canada.

William

Edited February 7, 2019 by willeica

[adan]

7 hours ago, willeica said:

The Blue Book gives the same model No (11801) for both the V1 and V2.

Of note, the 1974 Canadian v.2 I used recently came with the original box - which showed illustrations (optical x-section and exterior) of the version 1 on the outside - deep protruding rear element.

But had the correct v.2 serial number (2727.... ) entered by hand in the appropriate space on the outside.

Which just goes to show that to Leica at the time, 1) a 28 Elmarit was a 28 Elmarit, 2) they ordered a supply of boxes in the v.1 era,  and were happy to just use them up once the v.2 arrived, and 3) the 28 Em was not a very fast seller, since they still had v.1-era boxes hanging around 2 years after the transition began.

 

Edited February 7, 2019 by adan

[luigi bertolotti]

12 hours ago, pgk said:

...It would be interesting to see if all the later v.1 lenses were labelled as German production which might well support this suggestion?

Well… my records are of course very partial… but fact is that I have some dozens between 2.196.908 and 2.197.933 - all Canada , and only 2.197.984 - 2.197.997 (*) - 2.198.003 and the odd 2.258.945  from Wetzlar (and no Canada within this range) …  if stats is science…

(*) last addition thanks to Paul…

Edited February 7, 2019 by luigi bertolotti

[jc_braconi]

My version I is 2 062 xxx ELC 1964 version II is 2 315 xxx ELC 1969

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Scrapbook]

My Version I from 1964 first batch. "Made in Germany"

Claus

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Alberti]

This thread is all about what Marco C calls the 'wasp waist' version (i translate myself ...) as JCB's post shows in the two appearances.

I am utterly confused as to the later 801 versions like the wiki states were made untill 1977.

They have a I would assume a lens design that is the same as the other standard  Elmarit II like nr 2543501 of which the pictures I see shows they have a straight distance scale, see: 

https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/File:M-28f28-ii.jpg 

So only the house is different - not going inward like the pictured one to mimic the waist of Brigitte Bardot 🙂 Or better said, to fall in the German design family of the SA and 35mm Summicron v1.

I lost out on a later 1975 type of this last week (I am soo sloow) as I am unsure what to get 😴. 

So, Luigi maybe, is there a optical difference?